Ethical Criteria of Truth: Evidence, Values, and Universal Principles

Ethical Criteria of Truth: Evidence and Errors

Evidence is the ultimate criterion of truth, but how do we measure the strength of evidence? Ethics is the most terrible and most glorious aspect of being human. The pattern of life, truth, and values, namely the need to distinguish truth from falsehood to avoid tragedy. Values are at stake as fundamental as peace, freedom, equality, and justice. This is very serious. Some say we cannot agree upon the formulation of ethical principles valid for humanity. Although in some cases there are violent disputes, often there is no disagreement on the fundamentals, but on how to accept or interpret the accepted principles. All these problems that ethics will have to resolve, but should not hide the fact that in many other things we have an ethical theory strong enough to be considered to have universal value.

For centuries, further criteria of truth in science have been studied. In ethics, many people think they do not exist, that in one's own consciousness, personal evidence "is the last judge in moral matters." Not so: there are strict criteria.

Basic Criteria (Ethical Criterion and Development Experience)

• Subjective Evidence: This criterion is fundamental. The subject has to appreciate how good the content of an ethical theory is. Subjective evidence may seem false to be overridden by other stronger evidence.
• Internal Acceleration of Evidence: Evidence that appears strong when analyzed is fragile. It is necessary to remember the distinction between intended meanings and values, such as the fundamental value of freedom.
• General Acceptance: An ethical standard is not only founded by being accepted by everyone. It would be the first world to guarantee its legitimacy.
• Two Ways of Argumentation that Increase the Force of Ethical Evidence:
  • The moral experience of humanity defended by Maritain serves to verify the value of the models put to an inquiry.
  • The arguments of an impartial observer go back to Adam Smith.
• Argumentative Dialogue Called "Dialogical Ethics": Defended by Apel and others. They consider that justice can only be achieved after an argumentative discussion in which all affected parties are involved in an ideal climate of communication.
• Universality: An ethical principle can be corroborated if it can be universalized. Kant considered this characteristic of all ethics, made in his categorical imperative: "Work in such a way that your behavior can serve as a universal rule of conduct."
• Coherence: A theory cannot be accepted if it says contradictory things.
• Consistency with Other Truths: An ethical model must be in accordance with science. It must join other systems with scientific varieties.
• Efficiency: Scientists preferentially choose a theory that is successful. Ethical rules aim to resolve very serious problems, so it is logical that effectiveness is a criterion of its truth.
• Prediction of Good Consequences: The ethical evidence of a theory can be corroborated if it can predict good consequences derived from its application. The elimination of the five great obstacles to the light of the indicated ethical programs (extreme misery, ignorance, dogmatism, hatred, and neighbor) allows us to foresee good consequences.
• Argumentum ad Horrorem: Demonstration similar to mathematics by "reduction to the absurd." If an ethical model is not fulfilled, horror will occur. Hence the name "reduction to horror."